Blog Page 262

Bezbednost finansijskih transakcija na mobilnim telefonima

Mobile

Prema istraživanju koje je tokom 2013. godine sprovedenla kompanija B2B International u saradnji sa kompanijom Kaspersky Lab o bezbednosnim rizicima korisnika, skoro…

Prema istraživanju koje je tokom 2013. godine sprovedenla kompanija B2B International u saradnji sa kompanijom Kaspersky Lab o bezbednosnim rizicima korisnika, skoro trećina korisnika se ne oseća bezbedno dok vrši elektronska plaćanja putem svojih smart telefona ili tableta. Nisu sigurni u zaštitu podataka svojih mobilnih telefona dok kupuju ili obavljaju funkcije elektonskog bankarstva.

Sistemi za elektronske radnje, elektronska plaćanja i elektronsko bankarstvo su dosta olakšali finansijske poslove. Možete platiti svoje račune, kupiti neke teže dostupne stvari, i izvršiti transakcije sa par klikova mišem-bez gubljenja vremena u redovima.

hp mobilni Bezbednost finansijskih transakcija na mobilnim telefonima

Široka upotreba smart telefona i tableta još više čini dostupnim onlajn bankarstvo: prenosivost i funkcionalnost ovih sprava znače da ne samo da sve možete da završite iz svoje kuće ili kancelarije, nego bilo gde gde možete da nađete pristup internetu i gde imate signal. Ne shvataju svi korisnici smart telefona i tableta prednosti pristupanja novca u pokretu, i čini se da mnogo oklevaju da potpuno prihvate mobilnu bankarsku tehnologiju.
Zabrinuti za svoju bezbednost

Istraživanje koje je sproveo B2B International pokazuje da 33% učesnika nikada ne bi koristilo mobilni uređaj za onlajn transakcije, kao što su plaćanje proizvoda u onlajn radnjama. Nešto manji, ali ipak značajan deo korisnika smart telefona i tableta (28%) se ne oseća bezbedno koristeći svoje uređaje za onlajn bankarstvo. A svega 22% korisnika tableta i 27% korisnika smart telefona bez problema koriste svoje finansijske podatke putem svojih uređaja.

Rezultati istraživanja nisu iznenađujući: 84% korisnika smart telefona (iPhone korisnici se ne računaju) i 74% korisnika tableta (iPad korisnici se ne računaju) koriste uređaje sa Android sistemom. Android je najpopularniji mobilni operativni sistem na svetu i zbog toga je najčešće napadan od strane sajber kriminalaca, što je logično, jer što više korisnika napadnu, prevaranti imaju veće šanse za zaradu. Sudeći po kompaniji Kaspersky Lab, 99% svih postojećih mobilnih malvera su napravljeni za Android. U 2012. godini, stručnjaci iz kompanije su pronašli 35000 malvera za Android. U prvih šest meseci u 2013. godini taj broj je vrtoglavo porastao na 47000.

Ove brojke su ubedile neke korisnike da izbegavaju sve ove uređaje, koristeći ih bez problema za onlajn finansijske transakcije-13% učesnika u istraživanju je reklo da nikada ne bi koristili Android zbog ovog posebnog razloga.

Lažne Android aplikacije za onlajn bankarske radnje, fišing napadi, i zli napadi koji su napravljeni da presretnu podatke korisnika putem tastature su neki od načina napada korisnika Android uređaja.

Teško da se korisnici smart telefona i tableta mogu kriviti za to što su izrazito oprezni prilikom korišćenja finansijskih usluga. Ipak, uprkos porastu broja pretnji za Android, korisnici mogu bezbedno da vrše plaćanja preko svojih uređaja tako što će ih zaštititi sa odgovarajućim bezbednosnim rešenjem.

 

Prijavite se kako bi ste potpuno besplatno primili najsvežije vesti sa domaće i globalne IT scene! Svako jutro, na vaš e-mail stizaće sve novosti objavljene u Personal magazinu.

Komentari

Imate komentar na ovaj zapis?

Just Half Of UK Digital Retailers Respond To Questions On Twitter [STUDY]

Just Half Of UK Digital Retailers Respond To Questions On Twitter [STUDY]

Slightly more than half of UK digital retailers responded to questions sent to them on Twitter in 2013, reveals a new study by MICROS taken in January of this year.

50.2 percent of retailers responded to a tweet asking them a direct question, up just 3 percentage points from last year, but significantly higher than 2011′s 12.3 percent, indicating that perhaps they’re finally getting the message. After all, if you’re not concerned enough to answer your customer’s questions, perhaps your biggest competitor is.

Just Half Of UK Digital Retailers Respond To Questions On Twitter [STUDY]

(Source: eMarketer. Customer support image via Shutterstock.)

Carl Bildt

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Carl Bildt
MSC 2014 Bildt Mueller MSC2014.jpg
Minister for Foreign Affairs
Incumbent
Assumed office
6 October 2006
(7 years, 127 days)
Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt
Preceded by Jan Eliasson
Prime Minister of Sweden
In office
4 October 1991 – 7 October 1994
(3 years, 3 days)
Monarch Carl XVI Gustaf
Deputy Bengt Westerberg
Preceded by Ingvar Carlsson
Succeeded by Ingvar Carlsson
High Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina
In office
14 December 1995 – 18 June 1997
Preceded by Position established
Succeeded by Carlos Westendorp
Leader of the Opposition
In office
23 August 1986 – 4 October 1991
(5 years, 42 days)
Prime Minister Ingvar Carlsson
Preceded by Ulf Adelsohn
Succeeded by Ingvar Carlsson
In office
7 October 1994 – 4 September 1999
(4 years, 332 days)
Prime Minister Ingvar Carlsson
Göran Persson
Preceded by Ingvar Carlsson
Succeeded by Bo Lundgren
Leader of the Moderate Party
In office
23 August 1986 – 4 September 1999
(13 years, 12 days)
Preceded by Ulf Adelsohn
Succeeded by Bo Lundgren
Personal details
Born Nils Daniel Carl Bildt
15 July 1949 (age 64)
Halmstad, Sweden
Political party Moderate Party
Spouse(s) Kerstin Zetterberg (1974–1975)
Mia Bohman (1984–1997)
Anna Corazza (1998–present)
Alma mater Stockholm University
Signature

Nils Daniel Carl Bildt, Kon:sGM12 m kedja (born 15 July 1949) is a Swedish politician and diplomat who served as Prime Minister of Sweden from 1991 to 1994. He was the leader of the liberal conservative Moderate Party from 1986 to 1999 and has served as Sweden’s Minister for Foreign Affairs since 6 October 2006.

Bildt has also been noted internationally as a mediator in the Balkan conflict, serving as the European Union‘s Special Envoy to the Former Yugoslavia from June 1995, co-chairman of the Dayton Peace Conference in November 1995 and High Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina from December 1995 to June 1997, immediately after the Bosnian War. From 1999 to 2001, he served as the United Nations Secretary-General‘s Special Envoy for the Balkans.

Background

This section of a biographical article needs additional citations for verification. Please help by adding reliable sources. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous or harmful. (May 2012)

Bildt was born on 15 July 1949 in Halmstad, Halland, to an old NorwegianDanish-Swedish noble family traditionally domiciled in Bohus county. The family’s most prominent lineage comes from Norway, where at least three of Bildt’s ancestors have been in a leadership position comparable with a modern prime minister. In the 16th century, Nils Henriksson av Østråt (Gyldenløve) served as Lord High Steward of Norway and Vincents Vincentson Lunge served as Viceroy of the Kingdom of Norway. In the 17th century, Jens Ovesonn Bjelke served as Lord High Chancellor of Norway, and was descended from King Haakon V of Norway through his daughter Agnes Hakonardottir, Dame of Borgarsyssel.[clarification needed] His great-great-grandfather, Baron Gillis Bildt, served as Prime Minister a century earlier and as a diplomat and a Marshal of the Realm of Sweden (riksmarskalk). His great-grandfather, General Knut Bildt, was chief of the Swedish General Staff. His great-grandfather’s brother, Carl Bildt, served in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs as Cabinet – Secretary (Swedish: kabinettssekreterare), the under secretary of state of foreign affairs, and was a renowned diplomat and member of the Swedish Academy. Bildt’s grandfather Nils Bildt was a colonel and chief of the Halland Regiment. Colonel Bildt and his family were neighbours to the Palme family. Bildt’s father Daniel Bildt (1920–2010) was a former major in the reserves of the now defunct Halland Regiment and a former bureau director in the now defunct Civil Defense Board’s Education Bureau. Daniel Bildt married Kerstin Andersson-Alwå in 1947.

Bildt’s brother, Nils, was born in 1952. Bildt was married to Kerstin Zetterberg from 1974 to 1975, Mia Bohman (daughter of former Moderate party leader and Minister of Economy, Gösta Bohman) from 1984 to 1997 and, since 1998, has been married to Anna Maria Corazza. Bildt has two children from his second marriage, Gunnel (born 1989) and Nils (born 1991). From his third marriage is Bildt’s son Gustaf (born 2004).

Early career

Bildt attended Stockholm University but never graduated. In 1968, while studying at Stockholm University, Bildt opposed the occupation of the Student Union Building and co-founded the Borgerliga Studenter – Opposition ’68 group. He served as chairman of the FMSF Confederation of Swedish Conservative and Liberal Students, a centre-right student organisation, in the early 1970s. Bildt displayed his commitment to the European Union project through joining the Young European Federalists and later becoming vice president of the Swedish section. In 2012, he stated, through his Twitter account, “I still believe that we must continue building federation of nation states. Necessary evolution to meet new challenges.”[1]

When the non-socialist formed government in 1976, Bildt served as the Moderate Party coordinator as close collaborator of the party leader and Minister of Economy Gösta Bohman. Bildt became a Member of Parliament in 1979, although he instead served as State Secretary for Policy Coordination in the reformed non-socialist government after that election. As an MP in the early eighties, he became noted as an incisive and combative debater on foreign affairs, and found himself pitted against prime minister Olof Palme. Bildt was elected leader of the Moderate Party in 1986, succeeding Ulf Adelsohn. In 1991, the Social Democrats were defeated by a four-party coalition led by Bildt’s Moderate Party.

Prime Minister

On 4 October 1991, Bildt became the first conservative prime minister in 52 years. His government policies focused on liberalizing and reforming the Swedish economy and making Sweden a member of the European Union. It initiated negotiations for Sweden’s accession to the European Union, though the work to prepare the ground, at home and versus the EEC/EU, had already started during the final year of the Social Democratic government. The Social Democrats’ volte face on possible accession to the EEC was most likely a prerequisite for the positive referendum result. Bildt signed the accession treaty at the European Union summit of Corfu, Greece, on 23 June 1994.

Bildt in a meeting with former US President Bill Clinton at Grand Hotel in Stockholm (15 May 2001).

Economic reforms were enacted, including voucher schools, liberalizing markets for telecommunications and energy, privatizing publicly owned companies and health care, contributing to liberalizing the Swedish economy. Arguably, the subsequent budget cut-backs agreement with the Social Democrats and the continued spending cuts by the Social Democratic government following 1994 did more to reform the Swedish economy and the Swedish model than Bildt’s government’s program. The government’s effectiveness was hampered by in-fighting, most memorably over the construction of the Oresund Bridge.

The period was marked by a severe economic crisis.[2] In November 1992, the crisis reached its climax when Sweden left the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (the “and let the Krona float, after having defended the fixed exchange rate at tremendous cost. In some people’s opinion, single-minded defense of the Krona led to and continues to draw heavy criticism. Emergency cut-backs were negotiated with the Social Democrats during the crisis. The measures helped reduce the public deficit in 1994 and 1995, and allegedly revived growth in subsequent years. There is debate on whether the economic growth of 2006 were due to the devaluation of the Krona. Some see the increased importance of the export industry as testament to this.[citation needed]

Although Bildt’s Moderate Party scored a slight gain in the 1994 election, the Social Democrats gained slightly more ground, enough to unseat him after only one term. Bildt served as leader of the opposition until 1999, when he was succeeded as party leader by Bo Lundgren.

Balkan conflict

Bildt and Richard Holbrooke before peace talks in Sarajevo, Bosnia-Herzegovina in October 1995.

After his term as prime minister, Bildt was active as a mediator in the Balkans conflict, serving as the European Union Special Envoy to Former Yugoslavia from June 1995, co-chairman of the Dayton Peace Conference in November 1995, and High Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina from December 1995 to June 1997 immediately after the Bosnian War. From 1999 to 2001, he served as the United Nations Secretary General’s Special Envoy for the Balkans.

Bildt has been considered persona non-grata in several countries for remarks he has made against various governments. These remarks included one made in Croatia, where he “lost the credibility necessary for the role of a peace mediator” by suggesting that the former President of Croatia, Franjo Tuđman, was as guilty of war crimes as the Krajina Serb leader Milan Martić.[3][4] He was considered unwelcome in Russia after comparing their handling of the 2008 South Ossetia War to Nazi Germany under Hitler, and he was prevented from visiting Sri Lanka.[3][4][5]

During Operation Flash and Operation Storm in Croatia, he demanded that the UN and NATO launch military operations against the Croatian army.[citation needed]

Minister for Foreign Affairs

Foreign trips made by Carl Bildt as Minister for Foreign Affairs. (as of 27 December 2012)

Bildt with U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in Washington, D.C. on 24 October 2006.

On 6 October 2006, Bildt was appointed as Minister of Foreign Affairs in the newly formed cabinet of Fredrik Reinfeldt. This was seen by many as a surprising move. Not only had Bildt already served both as prime minister and as leader of the Moderate Party, but he and Reinfeldt had previously not gotten along very well.[6] He retained this post following the 2010 general election.

Controversies and criticisms

Opposition parties, politicians and journalists have questioned Carl Bildt’s suitability as Sweden’s Foreign Minister for his private stance on international issues and his private affairs as a businessman with interest in Russian gas giant Gazprom and Lundin Petroleum, an oil company with activities in war-torn Sudan.[7][8]

Lundin Oil operations in Sudan

Carl Bildt joined the board of directors of Lundin Oil AB in 2000[citation needed], after serious concerns had surfaced that the oil industry was exacerbating the war in Sudan. Lundin Oil was the lead operator of a consortium that worked in the area that had become the center stage of Sudan’s civil war. Despite the allegations were backed by successive UN Special Rapporteurs [2] and a Canadian Government investigation [3], Bildt won the public controversy in Sweden, allowing Lundin Oil to pursue its activities in Sudan. In June 2010, the European Coalition on Oil in Sudan published the report ‘Unpaid Debt’, arguing why Lundin may have been complicit in war crimes and crimes against humanity. The company has denied any wrongdoing, but after studying the report, the Swedish public prosecutor opened a criminal investigation. Following the decision by the public prosecutor, Members of Parliament in Sweden requested Bildt to step down, however, he refused. Human Rights Watch has in their report placed blame for the activities in Block 5A in Sudan on Lundin Oil saying that “no war-related displacement at all took place there until 1998”, the year when Lundin Oil established themselves in Sudan.[9]

Personal interests

After leaving his position as leader of the Moderate Party in 1999, other than engaging in international issues, Bildt took positions in the private sector and positions with international think tanks. His positions in think tanks included serving as the first non-US member on the Board of Trustees of the RAND Corporation in Santa Monica, and on the Advisory Board of the Centre for European Reform in London. He was a member of the board of the European Policy Centre in Brussels, the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, and the International Advisory Board of the Council on Foreign Affairs in New York.

Bildt served as non-executive director of the Baltimore-based US assets management company Legg Mason, Inc. He served as chairman of the board of Teleopti and chairman of the public affairs consultancy Kreab AB, and board member of the IT consultancy HiQ AB. He was chairman of Nordic Venture Network, which brought Nordic high-tech VC firms together in an informal network. In 2002, Bildt joined the board of directors of Vostok Nafta, a financial company primarily with holdings in Gazprom. Bildt was a member of the board of independent oil company Lundin Petroleum. He left his positions on the boards upon becoming Foreign Minister in October 2006.[citation needed]

Bildt has been criticized for the potential conflict of interest due to his previous position in Vostok Nafta, although he could not divest his stock options until the first two weeks of December 2006. The conflict of interest has the potential to affect Sweden’s relations with other European Union countries and Russia, since many EU countries are dependent on Russian oil and gas for their energy needs.[10][11] On 20 October 2006, Ulf Holm, a member of parliament for the Green Party, reported the Foreign Minister to the Riksdag Constitutional Committee to determine whether Bildt’s private economic affairs might represent a conflict of interest. Carl Söderbergh, Secretary General for the Swedish section of Amnesty International, has criticized Bildt since Human Rights issues are within the portfolio of the Minister for Foreign Affairs.[12] The criticism of Bildt for his interests subsided after he announced his intentions of divesting himself of all financial ties with the company. The work by the Constitutional Committee of the Parliament could not find any grounds for questioning the activities of Bildt in these regards. It was revealed that Swedish state pension funds (Swedish: AP-fonderna) had invested over one billion Swedish krona (140 million US$ or 75 million GBP) in Vostok Nafta.[13]

Bosnian war mediator criticisms

Carl Bildt has been criticized for his role as mediator in the Bosnian war. While prime minister, he was accused of indifference to the ethnic cleansing and genocide committed by the Bosnian Serb forces against Muslim and Croat civilians.[14][15] Bildt opposed any military intervention and criticized the former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher in 1993 for calling NATO to intervene against the Bosnian Serb forces, which led to the Sunday Times describing Bildt and other EU leaders as “robotic political pygmies” and their acceptance of the ongoing genocide as “shameful”.[15]

Following Bildt’s appointment as the EU special envoy to Yugoslavia, Tom Warrick from the Coalition for International Justice described Bildt as “dangerously misinformed about his own job description” and largely ignorant about the region.[14][16] The New York Times criticized Bildt for a nonchalant attitude towards the Srebrenica massacre when over 8,000 Bosniaks were killed,[14] and described him as being burdened with a reputation for accepting Bosnian Serb claims of good behavior at face value and overlooking evidence of atrocities against civilians.[17] International governments criticized Bildt for being ineffective and too closely affiliated with the Serbs in Bosnia and Serbia.[18] British historian Marko Attila Hoare accused Bildt of downplaying the number of victims killed in the Srebrenica massacre and ignoring Serbian war crimes.[19] Bildt was criticized for not mentioning the Srebrenica massacre during a lunch meeting on 15 July 1995 in Belgrade with the Serbian President Slobodan Milošević and the commander of the Bosnian Serb Army, Ratko Mladić, despite having received reports about the ongoing massacre.[20]

Following the early release of convicted war criminal Biljana Plavšić from Swedish prison in 2009, Bildt was reported to Sweden’s Committee on the Constitution for being disqualified to take part in such a decision. Bildt was accused of being personally involved in the case and being personally close to Plavšić.[21][22] Bildt testified at Plavšićs trial in 2002 at the Hague praising her, calling her post-war actions “brave” and “courageous”.[23]

Other controversies

Bildt has been questioned for his role as a member of the International Advisory Council of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, a group with ties to the Bush administration pushing for an invasion of Iraq in 2003.[24][25]

On 8 April 2008, during his visit in Israel and Palestinian Authority, Bildt gave an interview to Swedish state radio, where he responded to a question on whether it would be possible to strike a peace deal without the involvement of the Palestinian group Hamas, which remained under international boycott. He responded that the Palestinian Fatah-backed government could deal with Israel, in the same way that it was possible for the Israeli government to make peace with Fatah over the objections of the former Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who, similarly to Hamas opposed a two-state deal. Israeli officials issued very strongly worded condemnations of this, describing it as “horrible and stupid” and an example of “chutzpah” and “complete ignorance of the Middle East”, on the grounds that they saw it as comparing Hamas and Netanyahu as equals.[26]

After the 2008 South Ossetia war, Bildt wrote on his blog that the Russian rationale for its intervention, concern for the welfare of its expatriates in the Near Abroad, had similarities with the rationale for the annexation of Sudetenland. The Russian reaction was strong, and the Russian Foreign Ministry announced that Bildt was no longer considered welcome in Moscow.[27] Bildt called South Ossetian independence “a joke”, and said it would be supported only by a “miserable” lot of countries.[28]

It was revealed following the organization WikiLeaks release of classified diplomatic documents that US diplomats considered Bildt as “stubborn”, “arrogant” and to have “limited political skills”.[29] Bildt was described as thinking he has more power and influence than he really has and a “medium size dog with big dog attitude”.[30] The US president George W. Bush was advised before a meeting to “play on Bildt’s desire to operate at a high level” and to pretend to be impressed by his previous international assignments.[31] Other US diplomats and politicians were also advised to play on Bildt’s self-image to “keep him on a good mood”.[30]

There have been reports that Wikileaks has documents proving Carl Bildt is a US spy, with various sources claiming Wikileaks is attempting blackmail.[32]

In August 2012, Bildt accused his Ecuadoran counterpart of living in a “fantasy world” for granting political asylum to Wikileaks founder Julian Assange.[33]

Internet activities

Bildt was an early pioneer among politicians of using the Internet for communicating. On 4 February 1994, he sent an email message to US president Bill Clinton, which was the first publicly known electronic message sent between two heads of government. In the message he praised Clinton’s decision to end the trade embargo on Vietnam.[34]

In the same year, he also started a weekly electronic newsletter which was active until 2005. He is an active blogger, starting his first blog in February 2005. His current blog, started in January 2007, is one of the most widely read political blogs in Sweden.

On 30 May 2007, he officially opened a “Swedish embassy” in the virtual world Second Life.[35] The embassy, called “Second House of Sweden”, is a virtual replica of House of Sweden, the Swedish embassy building in Washington, D.C..

During Bildt’s time as Foreign Minister, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has opened a channel on YouTube which has been active since early 2008.

Bildt maintains a personal Twitter feed in English with approximately 250,000 subscribed followers.

Human rights advocacy

Carl Bildt is involved with the Institute for Information on the Crimes of Communism, where he is an honorary member and contributor to its publications.[36]

Honors

Bildt has an honorary doctorate from the University of St Andrews.

Bildt is a member of the Club of Madrid,[38] an independent non-profit organization composed of 87 democratic former presidents and Prime Ministers from 57 different countries.

References

  1. Jump up ^ Bildt, Carl (7 September 2012). “Twitter”. Retrieved 8 January 2013. “Discussed EU future. I still believe that we must continue building federation of nation states. Necessary evolution to meet new challenges.”
  2. Jump up ^ Between 1990 and 1994, per capita income declined by approximately 10% – http://hdr.undp.org/docs/publications/ocational_papers/oc26c.htm.
  3. ^ Jump up to: a b “Sweden’s Foreign (Ethnic) Minister Carl Bildt renews old ties with Hillary Clinton”. Asian Tribune. Retrieved 2012-06-12.
  4. ^ Jump up to: a b “Persona non-grata”. Tititudorancea.com. Retrieved 2012-06-12.
  5. Jump up ^ FLIGHT FROM CROATIA: Refugee column hit from the air
  6. Jump up ^ Kellberg, Christina (18 September 2006). “Berättelsen om Fredrik Reinfeldt”. Dagens Nyheter (in Swedish). Retrieved 4 July 2009.
  7. Jump up ^ PM Nilsson, “Bildt måste gå”, Expressen, 11 January 2007 (Swedish).
  8. Jump up ^ Fredrik Malm, “Bildt måste byta politik eller avgå”, Expressen, 15 January 2007 (Swedish).
  9. Jump up ^ Human Rights Watch. “Sudan, Oil, and Human Rights”. Retrieved 11 March 2012.
  10. Jump up ^ Bildt gör miljonklipp på ryska gasoptioner, Affärsvärlden, 11 October 2006 (Swedish).
  11. Jump up ^ Bildts aktieinnehav “omdömeslöst”, Dagens Nyheter, 19 October 2006 (Swedish)
  12. Jump up ^ Bildt KU-anmäls för aktieinnehav, Svenska Dagbladet, 20 October 2006 (Swedish).
  13. Jump up ^ AP-fonder investerar i Vostok Nafta [1], Aftonbladet, 4 November 2006 (Swedish).
  14. ^ Jump up to: a b c Dilsa Demirbag-Sten, Oförebildtlig, Expressen, 16 October 2006 (Swedish).
  15. ^ Jump up to: a b Ahlmark, Per (24 October 2006). “Du vet ju hur Carl är”. Dagens Nyheter (in Swedish). Retrieved 2009-03-28.
  16. Jump up ^ “BosNet Digest V5 No. 11 / Jan. 7, 1996”. Hri.org. Retrieved 2012-06-12.
  17. Jump up ^ Mr. Bildt’s Responsibility in Bosnia, The New York Times, 17 December 1995
  18. Jump up ^ Cortright, David (1997). The Price of Peace: Incentives and International Conflict Prevention. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield. p. 166. ISBN 978-0-8476-8556-1.
  19. Jump up ^ Attila, Marko (21 July 2009). “Swedish foreign minister Carl Bildt denies over half the Srebrenica massacre « Greater Surbiton”. Greatersurbiton.wordpress.com. Retrieved 2012-06-12.
  20. Jump up ^ Hvidfeldt, Anders (1 August 1998). “Bildt höll tyst om massakern”. Aftonbladet (in Swedish). Retrieved 2011-03-29.
  21. Jump up ^ Mikael Stengård, Thomas Bodström: Beslutet är jävigt, Aftonbladet, 22 October 2009 (Swedish).
  22. Jump up ^ On Biljana Plavsic’s Early Release, SvD, 23 October 2009 (Swedish).
  23. Jump up ^ Bodström KU-anmäler Bildt, SvD, 23 October 2009 (Swedish).
  24. Jump up ^ “Bildt in hot water over Iraq war lobbying”, The Local, 23 February 2007.
  25. Jump up ^ Vad Carl Bildt gjort för kriget, Aftonbladet, 27 October 2006 (Swedish).
  26. Jump up ^ Hoffman, Gil (10 April 2008). “Swedish FM likens Netanyahu to Hamas”. Jerusalem Post (Jerusalem). Retrieved 2009-03-28.
  27. Jump up ^ Sweden evokes Hitler in condemning Russian assault
  28. Jump up ^ Kremlin is told that move could backfire, Financial Times, 27 August 2008.
  29. Jump up ^ Holmström, Mikael (6 December 2010). “Bildt ger USA problem”. Svenska Dagbladet (in Swedish). Retrieved 2011-07-12.
  30. ^ Jump up to: a b Larsson, Thomas (5 December 2010). “Bildt har begränsad politisk förmåga”. Sveriges Television (in Swedish). Retrieved 2011-07-12.
  31. Jump up ^ Stengård, Mikael (5 December 2010). “Bildt har satt på sig en för stor kostym”. Aftonbladet (in Swedish). Retrieved 2011-07-12.
  32. Jump up ^ “Expressen: Carl Bildt läcker till USA | Hbl.fi/nyheter” (in (Swedish)). Hbl.fi. 22 February 2012. Retrieved 2012-06-12.
  33. Jump up ^ Prince, Rosa (17 August 2012). “Wikileaks: Swedish minister says Ecuador living in ‘fantasy world’ over Julian Assange”. Irish Independent (Independent News & Media). Retrieved 17 August 2012.
  34. Jump up ^ “First Email Bildt to Clinton”, bildt.net.
  35. Jump up ^ Simmons, Carl, Sweden opens virtual embassy 3D-style, Sweden.se, 2007-05-30.
  36. Jump up ^ “UOK – Upplysning om kommunismen”. Institute for Information on the Crimes of Communism. Retrieved 2009-10-19.
  37. Jump up ^ http://www.parliament.uk/deposits/depositedpapers/2009/DEP2009-2154.doc
  38. Jump up ^ The Club of Madrid is an independent non-profit organization composed of 81 democratic former presidents and Prime Ministers from 57 different countries. It constitutes the world’s largest forum of former Heads of State and Government, who have come together to respond to a growing demand for support among leaders in democratic leadership, governance, crisis and post-crisis situations. All lines of work share the common goal of building functional and inclusive societies, where the leadership experience of our Members is most valuable.

External links

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Carl Bildt.
Party political offices
Preceded by
Carl Cederschiöld
Chairperson of the Confederation of Conservative and Liberal Students
1973–1974
Succeeded by
Mats Svegfors
Preceded by
Ulf Adelsohn
Leader of the Moderate Party
1986–1999
Succeeded by
Bo Lundgren
Political offices
Preceded by
Ingvar Carlsson
Prime Minister of Sweden
1991–1994
Succeeded by
Ingvar Carlsson
New office High Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina
1995–1997
Succeeded by
Carlos Westendorp
Preceded by
Jan Eliasson
Minister for Foreign Affairs
2006–present
Incumbent

The Rise Of Social Media In E-Commerce [INFOGRAPHIC]

The Rise Of Social Media In E-Commerce [INFOGRAPHIC]

Did you know that 75 percent of socially-generated e-commerce sales in 2013 came from Facebook, Twitter and Pinterest?

Indeed, a majority of consumers now use social media to guide their purchases, with four in ten going on to purchase an item in-store or online after sharing it on Facebook, Twitter or Pinterest. When you consider that U.S. consumers are tipped to spend an eye-opening $327 billion online in 2016, well… you do the math.

This infographic from MobStac takes a closer look at the rise of social media in e-commerce.

The Rise Of Social Media In E-Commerce [INFOGRAPHIC]

(Source: MobStac. Shopping cart image via Shutterstock.)

Over 10,000 Tweets A Day Contain Racial Slurs [STUDY]

Over 10,000 Tweets A Day Contain Racial Slurs [STUDY]

A think tank estimates that there are approximately 10,000 tweets per day that contain racial and ethnic slurs – which amounts to 1 in 15,000 total tweets.

UK-based think tank Demos published a study on the way hate speech is employed online.

The team scraped all tweets that contained one or more pre-defined slurs (which were crowdsourced via Wikipedia) over a nine day period in November. These tweets were filtered to ensure the slurs occurred in the body of the tweet, as opposed to the username of the individual sending the tweet. All-in-all, the researchers studied 126,975 tweets.

Using two types of analysis, the researchers determined that there are approximately 10,000 English tweets per day that contain some sort of slur. However, not all slur-containing tweets were meant to be offensive.

The study found that slurs were employed in six distinct ways: negative stereotype; casual use of slurs; targeted abuse; appropriated; non-derogatory; and offline action/ideologically driven.

And the most common type of slurs were actually meant in a non-offensive, non-abusive manner, or to express in-group solidarity. This group represented between 47.5-70 percent of tweets, depending on whether human or computer analysis were employed.

The study also found that different specific slurs were used in different ways, with some lending themselves more to descriptive uses while others were used more derogatorily.

You can read the study in its entirety here [PDF].

(Expletive image via Shutterstock)

[Today in PD] 2013 Forum: The Future of Public Diplomacy

Thursday, February 13th 2014

The panel sits at a table flanked by a video screen with Tweets scrolling

In the future, more flexibility, risk-taking and reform will be required of public diplomacy practitioners and policy makers, our panel concluded.

This was the last of three plenary sessions of the PDC’s Fall Forum held November 12, 2013, at the George C. Marshall Conference Center of the U.S. Department of State.  It was our “look to the future,” with the mandate to imagine what lies in store for public diplomacy.

Sarah Batiuk, Kristie Conserve, and Katherine Brown prepared the following summary of panel proceedings.

Moderator Katherine Brown, Executive Director of the U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy, introduced the session by discussing public diplomacy’s moment to draw lessons and move forward from the merger between the U.S. Information Agency and the U.S. Department of State and the post-9/11 foreign policy era.

She introduced three panelists to explore the future through the perspectives of leaders at the State Department, the news media, and the NGO community: Macon Phillips, Coordinator of the Office of International Information Programs at the State Department; Rajiv Chandrasekaran, Senior Correspondent and Associate Editor at The Washington Post; and Peggy Blumenthal, Senior Counsel to the President at the Institute of International Education. The conversation focused on the need for public diplomats to take more risks in engaging media and publics; to revamp their skillsets and the bureaucratic and political cultures that impede risk-taking; and to allow for greater flexibility in exchange programs so they can be more inclusive.

Macon Phillips discussed how U.S. public diplomacy activities in the information age need to compete for attention, be more responsive, and focus on maintaining and strengthening relationships. The State Department, he said, “is making progress in engaging publics through social media beyond thinking of it as a new communications outlet and really thinking about how we have a modernized set of tools for diplomats to use.” To do that, however, diplomats will have to “communicate as they see fit and not go through these cumbersome clearances processes,” which can stifle creativity. This involves a certain amount of risk-taking.

Public diplomats also need to design efforts in order to achieve specific outcomes. To build responsive relationships, public diplomats must listen and show empathy for foreign audiences. Phillips said, “Empathy is really important. It’s the ability to listen to what someone else has to tell you and then connect it to something about the United States that’s relevant to them and to give them the sense that we’re genuinely listening, because we are… Whether that’s person-to-person or whether you’re looking at a larger public diplomacy campaign design, no more can we have salespeople. To some extent, people need to have much more customer service skillsets and listen.” The fundamental question, he asked, was “How can we… have a more empathetic approach to public diplomacy and how we can have a more creative, less risk-averse response?”

Rajiv Chandrasekaran also spoke about the need to break down the risk-averse culture at the State Department. He emphasized that public diplomats and public affairs officials need to be accurate and first with the truth in traditional and social media, but also more transparent. The bureaucratic culture needs to change to allow them to be more responsive. U.S. diplomats, in the eyes of the news media and the public, are often seen as being slow and defensive. The U.S. military is much better at empowering their officials and soldiers with engaging the news media and speaking honestly about challenges and limitations. The clearance process for embassy officials to speak with the media is onerous, which makes diplomats and “public diplomats out in the field irrelevant.” They miss out on coversations entirely. He said, Washington is still not moving fast enough and not delegating enough authority to the posts to make smart decisions.” Oftentimes, the restriction to access of officials can lead to conspiratorial thinking by local media and local publics about America’s strategy and action in their country. This lack of access “fuels its own set of counter-narratives that are fundamentally unproductive for U.S. interests, which can be combated with just a modest dose of increased transparency.”

Public diplomacy is in a challenging period, Chandrasekaran stated. When discussing the legacies that public diplomats must contend with, he said that diplomats are dealing with the reverberations of two wars post-9/11 and the continued fallout of government eavesdropping and surveillance programs. Security concerns consistently hamper U.S. diplomats’ ability to engage foreign audiences. In addition to the bureaucratic constraints, diplomats face limitations from the U.S. political system. The nature of the political system does not lend itself to sustained clarity on key U.S. foreign policy issues. Plus, the aversion to risk at the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development to engage foreign audiences is understandable given that Congress rarely gives civilians the same benefit of the doubt that they give soldiers. Congress is more likely to criticize civilians who take risks in complex environments and fail than members of the military.

Chandrasekaran pointed out, however, that activities like the Fulbright program have proved to be immensely valuable and he emphasized the importance of international educational exchanges in wartime and high-threat environments.

Peggy Blumenthal stressed the importance of non-governmental organizations in U.S. public diplomacy strategy. They can extend the reach of U.S. higher education programs and therefore increase the opportunity to both tell stories and listen to those of others’. “America is still an incredible magnet, particularly in the field of education,” she explained. “For every student that you bring on a Fulbright, there are 820,000 students here on their own dollar, or on some kind of scholarship from their own country to study in the United States. Those are ambassadors. Those are people who learn about American first-hand.”

Blumenthal shared the findings from the Institute of International Education (IIE) 2013 Open Doors  survey, which discloses that more Americans are going abroad and more international students – especially Chinese, Brazilians, Saudis, and Iraqis — are coming to the U.S. These countries’ governments are offering scholarships for their students to get an American education, she stressed, and many others are coming at their own expense. Looking to the future, Blumenthal also said that the State Department’s Education and Cultural Affairs Bureau’s investment in MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses) is a wise decision because it will increase international students’ interest in coming to the U.S. to receive the education in-person.

Last, Blumenthal emphasized, in order to be as inclusive and far-reaching as possible, education and cultural programs need to be increasingly flexible. By traveling abroad, Americans learn humility and become curious about non-American politics, culture, and overall ways of life. These experiences do not necessarily need to be year-long. She explained, “I actually do believe that a properly structured two-week experience can be life-changing.  All you need to do is learn that other people see America differently.”

Katherine Brown is the Executive Director of the United States Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy.  She has a PhD in Communications from Columbia University and more than a decade of experience working at the nexus of national security, development and global media.

…click authors name for more info

Author: Guest Contributor

We welcome comments from our readers that advocate and shed light on the subject of public diplomacy. We avoid discussion that is politically partisan, commercial in nature or offensive, and the Council reserves the right to remove such comments.

[Today in PD] Geoana, Appointed High Representative To Promote Strategic Economic Projects And Public Diplomacy

Under a recent decision of Prime Minister Victor Ponta, Social Democratic Senator Mircea Geoana was appointed high representative of the Prime Minister to promote strategic economic projects and public diplomacy programmes.

According to the decision on Wednesday published in the Official Journal, the office to be held by Geoana, which will be honorary and pro bono, will be attached to the Prime Minister’s Chancellery.

The document mentions that the high representative of the Prime Minister to promote strategic economic projects and public diplomacy programmes will have the following objectives to meet: promoting certain regional economic objectives, considering the interests of the local business environment in accessing new markets, including from the perspective of the initiative to create an economic corridor that is dubbed ‘The New Silk Road’; organising in Romania annual conferences in the economic field, so as to attract international political personalities and important business people; participating in projects developed by the Government for promoting Romania abroad in order to attract foreign investments; cooperating with organisations that operate in the civil, economic and academic fields to promote Romania’s relation with other emerging markets; promoting business opportunities in Romania at such economic events or in relation with the international organisations.

The decision that was signed by Ponta also specifies that part of the high representative’s duties will be related to his cooperation with the relevant ministries and institutions for the economic field, especially with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Economy, the Department for Energy and the Department for Infrastructure Projects and Foreign Investment.

Moreover, the participation of the high representative of the Prime Minister to promote strategic economic projects and public diplomacy programmes in international meetings, as well as the activity or attendance reports will be submitted to the Prime Minister for approval, while also requiring the approval of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MAE) and other ministries, as the case may be.

Twitter Trends: Now In 50 More Locations, Including Zurich, Jerusalem And Bangkok

Twitter Trends: Now In 50 More Locations, Including Zurich, Jerusalem And Bangkok

Twitter has dramatically expanded the reach of its Twitter trends product with the feature expanding to 50 new locations as of today, including cities in Algeria, Denmark, Egypt, Israel, Lebanon, Qatar and Thailand.

Check the visual below for the full list:

Twitter Trends: Now In 50 More Locations, Including Zurich, Jerusalem And Bangkok

(Source: Twitter.)

Digital Diplomacy against hostile regimes *Text from Voice of Russia 30.11.2011. *

Interview with Gennady Yevstafyev, retired Lieutenant-General of Russian Intelligence Service

This week Cyber Czar of the United States Mr. Cross, he is coming to discuss the problems, he is coming not at the very official style, because in Russia there are words that Cybersecurity is threatened and Digital Diplomacy of the United States is a new method of neocolonialism and instrument of destabilization of hostile regimes and so on. These are exactly the words which are used in Russia.

But Mr. Yevsafyev do you think we could actually explain in full details to our listeners the essence of Cyber Diplomacy or Digital Diplomacy, however you call it.

We have, first of all, to note that the cyber problem is very closely connected with Internet and the Internet was established in 1998, because at that time there was a decision to start The Internet Corporation for very innocent things, for assigned names and numbers, abbreviation is ICANN. It is based on the multi-stakeholder model, but whatever you say the whole thing belongs to the United States. They were very much ahead of technological development in cyberspace and they still dominate the Internet situation. Usually the problems are discussed in the so called Internet Government’s Forums, abbreviation is IGF, but with the course of time it came out that it is a very multi-dimensional problem and Cyberspace Security is multi-sided because Cyberspace Security is, first of all, the security of day-to-day life of the international community, because invention of Internet and its establishment is a tremendous breakthrough in the usual man’s life, you everything through the Internet, now. And it is very helpful in many ways in economic and social and all this kind of things. But with the course of time it came out that Internet is not that innocent, it could be used against the so called hostile regimes. We have seen this number of times.

Download audio file

But could you give us an example?

For example, only this year, which was very rich with all kinds of global cyber space manifestations, you all remember that there was a story of a so called Stuxnet Cyber Worm, which was introduced and penetrated the Iranian Nuclear Organization and to a logic stand has really destroyed, not physically, but, you know, it is a virtual thing, it destroyed the operation of many elements of Iranian Nuclear Industry.

But I’ve heard some analysts say that digital information technologies have also been used in the Balkans crisis, but is that truly so?

It has been also established, you remember when there was Balkan crisis, and Balkan crisis was closely connected with the activity of all kind of extreme Islamist movements and everybody was happy that in the long run the population in Kosovo and some other areas, dominated by Islamic religion, was introduced into the modern age through Internet, but then Special Services found out that numerous Internet cafes, which were established by hundreds of mosques around the Balkan-Muslim areas were, in fact, the centers through which the mobilization of extremist terrorist activity was arranged and after thorough inner investigations in the beginning of this century it was variably established that many of the would be conspirators and terrorist exchange the ideas through Internet and arrange their meetings and operations using the Internet facilities. So, it is not that simple, but nowadays we are very much in discussion of, for example, cyberspace attacks on hostile regimes.

Hostile regimes, so are we talking about direct Government involvement and new Foreign Policy too?

I’m quite sure that with certain extent, though the Americans deny this, but their General the Head of African Command said he was not rejected for any kind of weapons he asked for. African Command was responsible for handling of Libya’s situation. Though Americans are trying to say that they were not using the cyberspace for attacking, for example, Libyan enter Aircrafts System, but funny enough the system, which was not a sophisticated system, but nevertheless, it stopped to operate.

You know, it is interesting, because I’ve been listening to Mr. Cross’s lecture on the new opportunities, presented by the use of digital technologies and answering a question he reminded us of Robert Gates words that Cyberspace has become a new theatre of warfare, but then he also said that he didn’t believe in Twitter Revolution and of course he never spoke of cyber warfare, you know.

The problem is becoming more and more serious. Sometime ago, before the whole Arab Spring started the United States have distributed one 100 000 computers free for local population in Arab countries. Of course, not all 100 000 computers that were distributed free found their way into the hands of opposition elements, but as it stands now major part of it was used to arrange the events of Arab Spring in different Arab countries: Egypt, Tunisia, Libya and so on. That made some people extremely worried, it was distributed free and the whole development, as it stands now, comes to a simple fact that Americans have admitted that Cyberspace is a very important instrument for their Foreign Policy and they are using it to impose the views on population and even some regimes in the outside world. Hillary Clinton is supposed to be godmother of creation of the new instrument of American Foreign Policy and we have a fact of creation special new department in the State Department of the United States, in the most important embassies they have special units, which are handling the cyber space.

But using for what? Can we specify the ultimate purpose of the operation?

There are different purposes: to prevent it’s being used by terrorists but, on the other hand, they are using it to achieve their goals, so, in fact, we have a huge growing problem as it stands now. For example, the Pentagon, as stated, is attacked very often by hackers. This is another phenomena of the whole problem, and not only the private people are attacking but some foreign countries allegedly attack American net services of the Armed Forces and Navy and so on. And they stated that attack on their vital facilities is tent amount to declaring a war and in certain cases they allow themselves in reply, if they established and identified the source of attack and if it is state motivated attack, to claim that they can use nuclear weapons to punish the perpetrators.

But in that case there could always be a good justification for starting a war just considering the number of hacker attacks?

Of course, our people for example in Russia claim that there are about ten thousand cases of hacker attacks on government facilities in our country. The biggest problem of all is to identify the source of attack. For example, in the Stuxnet nobody was firmly sure that it was American or Israeli attack. Everybody is saying aloud about this but to prove is extremely difficult especially when we deal with countries of sophisticated nature and sophisticated achievements in this area.

But something needs to be done then. Is anything being done?

There is already growing effort in the world to try to find the way to cope with these problems and, for example, China, Russia and some other countries propose an international code of conduct for information security, their idea is to increase the role of governments in directing and operating the cyber space. Since Americans claim that they are going to defend their right to use cyber space without any hindrance, there is a growing difference but not only between Russia, China and the United States on the matter, but many other Western countries are also very much worried about the uncontrolled expansion of Internet and it being used by violent demonstrators, for example, in Britain the government of Britain is victim of many arranged demonstrations and this arrangement went through Internet and the Foreign Minister Hague has admitted that Internet requires some sort of control because it could not go uncontrolled like it is going now.

So, the problem is obviously there. But however Mr. Cross was insisting on what he termed as the openness of the Internet. Now the U.S. position as far as I understand it is that Internet should not be state controlled. But is there an alternative vision?

We have international efforts to start doing something. I already mentioned that there is Russian-Chine international code of conduct but there are meetings. For example, in Yekaterinburg recently this autumn there was a meeting of 52 countries arranged by our Security Council Office on the matters of Internet, and we have presented our views, Russian views, on that. Then in London on the 1st or on the 2nd of November there is going to be an international meeting for discussion of the problems of the global cyber space security.

But do the Americans support these efforts?

We must note that Americans got worried because there is definite effort to try to find common denominator on Internet among many countries. And as it is going now, it is definitely not on the American conditions but on the more balanced and serious attitude towards the possibility of controlling the cyber space. By the way, the treaty of collective security of former Soviet States recently had a meeting and there were critical elements in this meeting on this use of facebook, and tweeter, and youtube. This official dissemination of information is good but on the part of the Americans financial effort to support opposition and even insurgency activity in some countries, we have to admit that we don’t have the same kind of developed instruments for diplomacy in Internet but people say that Washington has established its position in the Internet and they do not want to see them, they don’t want to listen other countries and that’s why we have to deal with all kinds of possibilities. For example, Americans would sooner or later leave Afghanistan and we will see huge problems for the Central Asian nations. And we already see the elements of American policy in the field of using cyber space to influence the mood and the future behavior of the population of the Central Asia when we are going to see that secular regimes in number of these countries fall. And Americans would try to introduce their elements into the real life in the area, which is so vital for Russia.

So, just let me specify, we are talking about Central Asia, an area, which is so far away from the U.S. itself.

The experience shows that in Middle East, for example, Americans did not care. They brought out secular regimes and they now are very happy for a very short period of time with very dubious regimes with some dubious histories behind them.

Well, Mr. Yevstafiev, thank you very much and I am quite positive that we are going to discuss this subject in our future programs and just to remind you, our guest speaker was Gennady Yevstafiev, retired Lieutenant General of the Russian Intelligence Service.

Twitter Testing Photo Heavy, Facebook-A-Like Profile Redesign

Twitter Testing Photo Heavy, Facebook-A-Like Profile Redesign

Have you seen the new Twitter?

No, not that new Twitter. That’s so four weeks ago. This new Twitter. You know, the one that looks a bit like Facebook.

Take a look at the image below, courtesy of Mashable scribe Matt Petronzio.

Twitter Testing Photo Heavy, Facebook-A-Like Profile Redesign

Photo heavy with larger fonts, a fresher look and some additional metrics (photos/video count, for one), Twitter is currently testing this design with its normal small subset of specially-selected users.

What do you think? Is this is a better look for Twitter?

(Source: Mashable.)

Канцеларија за јавну и културну дипломатију